Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Pegasystems PEGAPCSA87V1 Exam - Topic 8 Question 58 Discussion

Actual exam question for Pegasystems's PEGAPCSA87V1 exam
Question #: 58
Topic #: 8
[All PEGAPCSA87V1 Questions]

You are configuring duplicate case search logic in a case type. How do you ensure that resolved cases are not evaluated as potential duplicates?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A, B

by Royal at Jan 16, 2025, 12:12 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PEGAPCSA87V1 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Frederic
4 months ago
I agree with A, it’s clear and effective!
upvoted 0 times
...
Pa
4 months ago
Wait, why wouldn't we just filter out resolved cases?
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodolfo
4 months ago
C sounds a bit complicated, not sure about that one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ruby
4 months ago
I think D is the better choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andra
5 months ago
Option A seems straightforward.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ellsworth
5 months ago
I’m a bit confused about the difference between must match and weighted conditions. I feel like option B could also work, but I’m leaning towards option D since it specifically mentions potential duplicates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janine
5 months ago
I believe the key is to ensure that resolved cases are not considered at all. I think option A makes sense because it directly addresses the current case's status.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lisha
5 months ago
I think we practiced a similar question where we had to exclude certain statuses. I feel like option C might be relevant since it talks about weights, but I'm not completely confident.
upvoted 0 times
...
Josphine
5 months ago
I remember we discussed that using a must match condition is important to filter out resolved cases, but I'm not sure if it's option A or D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ming
5 months ago
The solution seems pretty clear to me. Option D is the way to go - add a must match condition to exclude resolved cases from the duplicate search.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosio
5 months ago
I'm not entirely sure about this one. I'll need to think it through carefully and review the options again before making a decision.
upvoted 0 times
...
Twana
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got it. Based on the options, it looks like we need to add a must match condition where the work status of the potential duplicates does not contain 'Resolved'. That should do the trick.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annamaria
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. Do we need to add a condition to the duplicate case search logic, or is there another way to handle this?
upvoted 0 times
...
Mi
6 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question. I think the key is to ensure that resolved cases are not evaluated as potential duplicates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
10 months ago
Option C all the way! Gotta love that weighted condition - it's like a little 'resolved' forcefield to keep those pesky closed cases at bay.
upvoted 0 times
Krystal
9 months ago
User 4: Definitely, adding a weight of '0' for resolved cases is a smart way to filter them out.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dean
9 months ago
User 3: I agree, Option C seems like the best way to make sure resolved cases are not considered duplicates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Van
9 months ago
User 2: Yeah, that weighted condition is a game-changer. Resolved cases won't stand a chance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eliseo
10 months ago
User 1: Option C all the way! Gotta love that weighted condition - it's like a little 'resolved' forcefield to keep those pesky closed cases at bay.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Phillip
11 months ago
Option C is the way to go. Checking the work status on both ends and giving 'Resolved' a weight of 0 is a smart way to avoid false positives.
upvoted 0 times
Jolene
10 months ago
Definitely, it's important to consider all possible scenarios when configuring duplicate case search logic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karan
10 months ago
Definitely, it's important to carefully configure the duplicate case search logic to avoid any issues with resolved cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Minna
10 months ago
That makes sense, by giving 'Resolved' a weight of 0, it ensures that it won't match as a potential duplicate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Myra
10 months ago
That makes sense, by giving 'Resolved' a weight of 0, it ensures that it won't match as a potential duplicate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Raylene
10 months ago
I agree, option C seems like the best way to make sure resolved cases are not considered duplicates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Muriel
10 months ago
I agree, option C seems like the best way to make sure resolved cases are not considered duplicates.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Earleen
11 months ago
I'd go with Option C as well. It's the only one that addresses the work status of both the current and potential duplicate cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noah
11 months ago
Option C seems like the most comprehensive approach. Evaluating the work status of both the current and existing cases, and weighting 'Resolved' as 0, ensures that resolved cases are not considered duplicates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fernanda
11 months ago
Hmm, that makes sense too. I guess it depends on how the logic is implemented in the case type.
upvoted 0 times
...
Frederick
12 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is D. We should check the potential duplicates, not the current case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fernanda
12 months ago
I think the answer is A, because we need to make sure the current case is not resolved.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel